You will need Adobe Reader to view some of the files on this page. See EPA's PDF page to learn more.

Question 1: Do the Part 280 requirements apply to process
waste traps (oil-water separators) located at various Schlumburger manufacturing
and metal finishing facilities?
[December 2, 1988 letter from Hunt and Hunt Engineering to Region VI]

Answer: In general, oil water separator systems are either
excluded or deferred from the regulations under one of the following provisions:
as field constructed tanks and/or as waste water treatment tank systems
subject (or not subject) to section 402 and 307(b) of the Clean Water Act.
[Undated letter
to Mr. Hunt (PDF) (3 pp, 13K)]

Question 2: Who is responsible for UST tanks that are
owned by one party, rented to a second party who in turn subleases them
to a third party?
[February 2, 1989 letter from Elmer Street]

Question 3: What does the term "deferred" mean in the
context of Part IV-Analysis of Today's Rule (Paragraph A.3) in the September
23, 1988 Federal Register and does the deferral apply to fuel oil storage
tanks for emergency generators at hospitals, commercial and industrial
facilities?
[May 9, 1989 letter from R. G. MacDiarmid of Goetting & Associates]

Answer: Yes, "if the tank sits upon or above the surface
of the floor and there is sufficient space to enable physical inspection
of the tank bottom." (53 FR 37121)
[July 25,
1989 memorandum to Mr. Naylor (PDF) (1 pg, 9K)]

Question 5: Are mixtures of gasoline and methanol, e.g.,
M85, to be treated as motor fuel or hazardous substances under 40 CFR Part
280?
[July 14, 1989 request from Jim Wisuri of the Steel Tank Institute
via Richard Wilson Office of Mobile Sources]

Answer: M85 must be stored in a hazardous substance UST
system because it contains 85 percent of a CERCLA-listed substance. Gasohols
containing lesser amounts of methanol (generally, 2.5 to 5 percent) may
be stored in petroleum UST systems. M85 can be stored in petroleum UST
systems if a variance can be obtained, where allowed, by the implementing
agency in accordance with the rule's requirements.
[December
3, 1989 letter to Mr. Wisuri (PDF) (2 pp, 9K)]

Answer: No, as long as they store motor fuel that is non
commercially used only by the monastery's residents. The monastery is considered
a residence and, therefore, the regulatory exclusion for farm and residential
USTs of 1,100 gallons or less storing motor fuel used for noncommercial
purposes applies.
[October 6,
1989 letter to Senator Heflin (PDF) (2 pp, 10K)]

Answer: The regulations do not provide that the owner
will be held "primarily" responsible for complying with these requirements.
Some provisions impose requirements on owners exclusively and some on both
owners and operators. A careful reading is necessary to determine whether
only one or both parties may be liable in the event of noncompliance.
[January 19,
1990 letter to Mr. Campbell (PDF) (3 pp, 13K)]

Question 8: Is the language in the UST rule's preamble
about the underground areas exclusion intended to imply that tanks in vaults
are no different than aboveground tanks and regulated as such?
[January 30, 1990 letter from Frances Phillips of Gardere & Wayne]

Answer: The preamble's reference was simply meant to contrast
vaulted systems as basically free from the problems that attend USTs and
cause them to leak. Typical aboveground tanks are not in an enclosed space
that is completely contained by a concrete barrier. The application of
aboveground tank standards to vaulted tank systems may not be technically
appropriate.
[March 20,
1990 letter to Ms. Phillips (PDF) (2 pp, 10K)]

Answer: They are not regulated because they are not a
listed hazardous substance, benzene is only present in de minimis quantities,
and they do not belong in one of the general categories of petroleum (and
are not derived from crude oil).
[April 19,
1990 memorandum to Mr. Phillips (PDF) (1 pg, 9K)]

Answer: Yes, the recommended form can be modified (as
provided by Mr. Nieshoff) for use by the tank seller to inform the tank
purchaser of their notification responsibilities under the rules.
[July 11,
1990 letter to Mr. Nieshoff (PDF) (1 pg, 8K)]

Answer: The Federal statute (Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act as amended, section 9001(1)(A)) exempts farm and residential
USTs storing less than 1,100 gallons of motor fuel for "noncommercial"
purposes. This exemption does not extend to small USTs owned by municipalities
and there is no technical basis to broaden in regulation the law's specific
exemption.
[November,
1990 letter to Mr. England (1 pg, 9K)]

Question 13: Are compartmentalized USTs considered one
tank for purposes of regulation?
[May 14, 1991 letter from the National Association of Texaco
Wholesalers, Inc.]

Answer: Compartmentalized tanks, and piping connected
to it, are considered one tank system by EPA because they are manufactured,
transported, installed, protected from corrosion, and often equipped with
leak detection as a single unit. Please check with your State or local
agency as they may interpret this question differently.
[August 12,
1991 letter to Mr. West (PDF) (1 pg, 9K)]

Question 14: Is a 550 gallon UST storing gasoline at a
nursery and landscaping business exempt from Part 280 regulations?
[May 16, 1991 letter from Congressman Jontz]

Answer: Generally, the "farm tank" exclusion applies
to USTs located at nurseries where products for retail stores, garden centers,
or landscaping businesses are grown and the fuel is used for agricultural
purposes only.
[Undated
letter to Congressman Jontz (PDF) (1 pg, 9K)]

Question 15: Do the Part 280 requirements apply
to the York Iceball Thermal Storage System consisting of a process whereby
a 25 percent ethylene glycol 75 percent water solution is circulated between
the ice ball storage tanks and chillers for the purpose of air conditioning
a building during daylight hours?
[August 5, 1991 letter from York International]

Answer: No, the exclusion found at 280.10(b)(3) for "operational
tanks" exempts this process from the regulations. The Thermal Storage System
is similar to hydraulic lift tanks and electrical equipment tanks which
are also included within this exclusion.
[Undated
letter to Ms. Thomas(PDF) (1 pg, 9K)]

Answer: Tanks that are not supported by backfill, can
be visually checked for evidence of leaks, and are built and installed
to aboveground tank codes are not subject to EPA's UST regulations. In
the example given, a vaulted tank system wherein the tank is within six
inches of the vault on three sides and set back far enough on the fourth
side for entry and inspection is not subject to the agency's UST regulations
if the access provided on the fourth side is sufficient to observe evidence
of a leak from anywhere on the tank vessel.
[August 26,
1991 letter to Mr. Nowman (PDF) (2 pp, 11k)]

Question 17: Are crude oil production gathering lines
exempt from jurisdiction under the UST program?

Answer: Yes, these gathering lines are exempt from jurisdiction
under the UST technical regulations. (For more details on gathering lines,
see page 37121 of the regulation's preamble, "Liquid Traps or Gathering
Lines Related to Oil or Gas Production and Gathering Operations.")
[There is no additional material included for this answer]

Question 18: Are Subtitle C tanks exempt from the UST
regulations? Are Subtitle I tanks on a Subtitle C site exempt from the
UST regulations?

Answer: Subtitle C tanks are regulated under Subtitle
C; the statute excludes their coverage under Subtitle I. Subtitle I will
apply to tanks storing regulated substances, including corrective action
on a subtitle C site without a RCRA permit. UST corrective actions underway
at facilities having interim status under RCRA may be subject to review
under Subtitle C during the development of the final permit (see final
rule preamble, page 37176).
[There is no additional material included for this answer]

Question 19: A new tank system was installed which violated
the interim prohibition standards since the piping was not cathodically
protected. The owner of this tank system sold the tank. Who
is responsible for the interim prohibition violation, the previous owner
or the new owner?

Answer: Either can be held responsible by the implementing
agency. the original owner was in violation of the interim prohibition
regulations and was responsible for protecting the piping. An enforceable
violation remains at the site, even under new ownership. the implementing
agency can pursue immediate compliance from the present owner or the past
owner (if the past owner can be found).
[There is no additional material included for this answer]

Question 20: Does the emergency spill or overflow containment
exemption of 40 CFR 280.10(b)(6) apply to sumps used to contain diesel
fuel discharges from electric power generation turbines?
[August 28, 1991 letter from James Hamula]

Answer: The sumps are not used for an emergency spill,
leak, or other unplanned occurrence. The sumps are designed to collect
diesel fuel from an electric power generation turbine immediately after
a false start. While these false starts are periodic, they are not emergencies.
Therefore, the false start sumps described in your letter are subject to
the 40 CFR Part 280 requirements.
[October
7, 1991 letter to Mr. Hamula (PDF) (2 pp, 11K)]

Question 21: What substances are
regulated as hazardous substances for USTs?

Question 22: Do tanks at a livestock exchange where livestock
are sold on a commission basis and are not raised or bred qualify for the
farm-tank exclusion?
[July 16, 1992 letter from Jean Riley of the Montana Petroleum Tank
Release Compensation Board]

Answer: No, although the preamble to the regulation does
not deal specifically with livestock exchanges, it clearly excludes from
the definition of farm tank retail stores and nursery centers where agricultural
products are "marketed, but not produced." A similar situation exists with
livestock exchanges where livestock is solely marketed, but not raised.
Thus, the mere fact that a tank is somehow associated with agricultural
operations does not, by itself, allow the tank to be defined as a "farm"
tank for purposes of the farm-tank exclusion under Subtitle I of RCRA.
[November
19, 1992 letter to Ms. Riley (PDF) (2 pp, 10K)]

Question 23: A company stores diesel fuel in an underground
tank. The diesel fuel is burned as a substitute for heating oil in
an on-site furnace. The definition of underground storage tank (UST)
in 40 CFR 2801.2(b) excludes any tank used for storing heating oil for
consumptive use on the premises where stored. Does the underground
tank storing diesel fuel meet this exclusion?

Answer: An underground tank storing diesel fuel will
meet this exclusion if the diesel fuel will be substituted for heating
oil; i.e., burned in a unit designed to use heating oil. the exclusion
to the definition of UST in subsection 280.12(b) as No. 1, No. 2, No. 4-light,
No. 4-heavy, No. 5-light, No. 5-heavy, and No. 6 technical grades of fuel
oil; residual fuel oils (including navy Special Fuel Oil and Bunker C)
and fuel substitutes such as kerosene and diesel fuel when used for heating
purposes (53 FR 37117; September 23, 1988). A tank storing
diesel fuel that will be burned as an alternative to one of these eight
types of heating oil in a unit designed to burn heating oil is excluded
from the definition of UST. If on the other hand, the diesel fuel
is being used for some other purpose, such as to power an internal combustion
engine or an emergency generator, the tank would not meet this exclusion.
The question of whether tanks associated with emergency power generators
are excluded from the UST definition under the heating oil exclusion is
somewhat complex. A discussion on page 37118 of the September 23,
1988 Federal Register specifically addresses such tanks. The
language indicated that the use of heating oil itself is not limited to
heating, but may include other on-site uses, such as emergency generators.
This discussion does not incorporate or address the stipulation that USTs
containing fuels other than heating oil are only exempt if the fuel is
burned as a substitute for heating oil in units designed for heating oil.
Therefore, the language on page 37117 should be consulted for tanks containing
other fuels such as diesel fuel.

The second part of the exemption involves the meaning of consumptive
use. The exclusion applies to heating oil used at the same site where
it is stored, but not to heating oil that is stored prior to resale, marketing
or distribution. Consumptive use of heating oil is not limited to
burning in a heater, but instead is defined as an on-site use (53 FR
37117). Therefore, the subsection 280.12(b) exclusion from the definition
os UST applies to (1) tanks storing one of the eight technical grades of
fuel oil prior to any on-site use, and (2) tanks storing fuel oil substitutes
prior to use for on-site heating purposes only.
[There is no additional material included for this answer]

Question 24: Section 301 of the Clean Air Act Amendments
of 1990 modifies the Clean Air Act (CAA) of 1986 by incorporating within
subsection 112 a list of 189 hazardous air pollutants. Many of these pollutants
were not previously regulated under the CAA. Would an underground storage
tank (UST) containing a newly designated CAA hazardous air pollutant be
subject to the standards promulgated in 40 CFR Part 280?

Answer: Yes. Owners and operators of USTs containing regulated
substances, as defined in subsection 280.12, must comply with the Part
280 standards. A regulated substance is any hazardous substance designated
pursuant to subsection 101(14) of CERCLA (excluding any substance regulated
as a hazardous waste under Subtitle C of RCRA), and petroleum products
or any fraction thereof. The term hazardous substance under subsection
101(14) of CERCLA is defined as any substance designated pursuant to subsection
3001 of RCRA, subsection 112 of the CAA, subsections 307(a) and 311(b)(2)(A)
of the Federal Water Pollution Act, subsection 7 of the Toxic Substances
Control Act, and any substance so designated in subsection 102 of CERCLA.
When a substance is added under statute identified in CERCLA subsection
101(14) it would then become a CERCLA hazardous substance by statutory
definition and therefore become a regulated substance under Part 280. Note
that any of the new substances or chemical categories added to the CAA
that are CERCLA hazardous substances (e.g., ethylene glycol) or petroleum
products are subject to regulation under Part 280 and this would not change.
[There is no additional material included for this answer]

Question 25: In a manufacturing operation
a coating which contains regulated substances is applied to metal part
that is manufactured on-site. The metal part is coated using the following
steps. After machining processes are completed, individual metal parts
are clipped to the bottom of a chain which is attached at its top to an
overhead conveyor system. The conveyor carries the metal part to an open-topped
tank containing a coating solution. The tank meets the definition of "underground"
provided in 40 CFR 280.12. Once over the tank, the conveyor system lowers
the metal part into the coating solution. The metal part remains submerged
in the solution as the conveyor travels the length of the tank, then the
conveyor system raises the metal part out the tank. The metal part is then
transported via the conveyor to any area where a facility employee unclips
the part and places it on a drying pad. Would this tank be exempt from
the UST regulations of 40 CFR Part 280, under the "flow through process
tank" exclusion of 40 CFR 280.12?

Answer: Yes, the tank would qualify for the exclusion
because it meets the three necessary conditions to be considered a "flow-through
process tank": it (1) forms an integral part of a production process; (2)
has a steady, variable, recurring, or intermittent flow of materials through
the tank during the operation of the process; and (3) is not used for the
storage of materials prior to their introduction into the production process
or for the storage of finished products or byproducts from the production
process. These conditions are met because the production process (coating)
actually occurs in the tank and therefore it is integral, and it does not
store prior to or after production. The flow is intermittent, satisfying
the second condition.
[There is no additional material included for this answer]

Question 26: Are USTs storing pure toluene considered
to be "petroleum" or "hazardous substance" UST systems, and are owners
and operators of such tanks required to maintain proof of financial responsibility?
[May 27, 1993 letter from Robert C. Galbraith, General Counsel to the
Iowa UST Fund Board]

Answer: Toluene is a hazardous substance as defined under
section 101(14) of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation,
and Liability Act (CERCLA). Therefore, for regulatory purposes under Subtitle
I, an UST storing pure toluene is considered to be a "hazardous substance
UST system," as defined in Part 280.12 of the UST regulations. Although
EPA has the statutory authority to require financial responsibility for
hazardous substance USTs, such as those containing toluene, EPA does not
currently require owners and operators of hazardous substance USTs to maintain
financial responsibility for taking corrective action or compensating third
parties for releases from those USTs.
[June 4,
1993 letter to Mr. Galbraith (PDF) (2 pp, 11K)]

Answer: "Annual," as used in 280.41(a)(2) and 280.44(b)
for tank and line tightness tests, means on or before the same date of
the following year. Similarly, "every 5 years," as used in 280.41(a)(1),
means on or before the same date five years later. States may have imposed
more stringent requirements than EPA's, and regulators may take into consideration
efforts taken by owners an operators to meet the requirements.
[March 7,
1993 memorandum to UST/LUST Regional Program Managers (PDF) (3 pp, 14K)]

Question 28: For an UST properly lined prior to December
22, 1988, when does the time period begin for the initial 10 year-year
and subsequent 5-year inspections of the lining? More specifically, must
the lining be inspected within 10 years from the date the UST was properly
lined or within 10 years of the effective date of the regulations?
[May, 1994 inquiry from Virginia through Region III]

Answer: For an owner/operator to comply with 40 CFR 280.21's
lining requirements, the lining must be inspected (and found to be performing
in accordance with original design specifications) within 10 years of properly
lining the UST (i.e., on or before the same date ten years later) followed
by subsequent 5 year inspections.
[March 9,
1995 memorandum to Ms. Tan (PDF) (2 pp, 12K)]

Question 31: What is the definition of "every 3 years"
as it applies to cathodic protection testing at 280.31(b)(1)?
[Question from Ms. Dorcee Lauen]

Answer: The term "every 3 years" as it relates to 280.31(b)(1)
means that a cathodic protection test must be conducted on or before the
same day of the third year after the previous cathodic protection test
has occurred.
[September 20, 1999 letter to Ms. Dorcee Lauen (PDF) (1 pg, 34K)]

Question 35: What are some examples of locations that are and are not
considered residential for the purposes of "residential tank" under the
definition of underground storage tank in 40 CFR part 280?

Answer: 40 CFR part 280 defines residential tanks as tanks located on
properties used primarily for dwelling purposes. Based on this
definition, EPA considers residential tanks to include those at homes,
apartments, nursing homes and assisted living facilities. EPA would not
consider tanks on properties such as prisons, hotels and camps to be
residential tanks. Note that the residential tank exclusion only
applies to tanks of 1,100 gallons or less in capacity that are used to
store motor fuel for noncommercial purposes. [There is no additional
material included for this answer.]